Government Regulation We Can All Get Behind
show comments
  • Jacksonian_Libertarian

    “All this nonsense could have been avoided if the feds regulated public pensions as strictly as private plans.”

    Yes, because the Federal Government is so very competent, and the Constitution gives the Federal Government the authority to do anything it wants. Oh, wait, never mind.

    • Philippe David

      Did you even read the article?? If the Feds had regulated the public pensions this mess would not have happened. Your snide remarks doesn’t even address what you quoted.

      • Corlyss

        “If the Feds had regulated the public pensions this mess would not have happened.”

        Do you have even a tiny clue how the Feds ended up controlling private pensions? Find that in Section 8. I’ll wait while you look . . .

        It was a bail out of the Studebaker Co. employees (autoworkers) during the company’s bankruptcy. Except for the stupidity of the reflexively “me too!” Republicans, it would have been a wholly owned Democratic legislative appropriation of a traditionally non-governmental function. If we didn’t have such a round-bottom SCOTUS, they would have put the kibosh on that aggrandizement in a snap.

  • Corlyss

    “if Democrats are serious about meaningful, competent government regulation.”
    Well, you can forget about that!
    Seriously tho’, this is not the job of the feds regardless of how highly VM prizes the statist approach to everything. This was a mess for the voters of the cities to take in hand. They should never have voted for pols who were sockpuppets for corrupt and greedy unions. They should never have allowed those sockpuppets to inaugurate union of public employees or collective bargaining for public employees. The public employee unions carry on about both their unionization and their collective bargaining rights as tho they came over on the Mayflower. In fact, that disastrous bit of screwed up management thinking happened in the late 50s at the earliest (because older legislators were not so stupid as to agree to it) and the 60s at the latest. The two are not sacred developments. They’re public policy, and a badly defective one at that.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.